Partners in Action Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860558130
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Litchfield Park, AZ, USA
Phone
4808820800
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,004,220
Expenses
$1,137,215
Assets
$746,543
Liabilities
$277,809

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOSHUA WARD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOSHUA WARD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $62,847 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Partners in action creates social impact by empowering, supporting, and serving sustainable humanitarian projects and charitable organizations and activities that primarily focus on improving the lives of individuals in underserved communities around the world, while sharing the gospel of jesus christ with those we come into contact with.

What it reported doing in 2024

Domestic child sponsorship/human services: funds granted from pia to affiliates to support gospel outreach, water safety, chaplaincy training & services, youth leadership training, the care of orphaned and vulnerable children, families living in poverty, those imprisoned, addicted, and unhoused, locally, across the USA, and with programs internationally. Services provided range from medical care, hygiene training, education, evangelism, discipleship and counseling.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 78% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.1%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 82.7%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.73 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Pass
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13.2%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.66; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.37; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.1% of revenue deployed · 82.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $941K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $63K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 14 filed related-organization links
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.